God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason is a book by the Dutch philosopher Herman Philipse, written in English and published in the. Given, however, that we are living in the age of science, Philipse argues that the natural theologian is faced with a dilemma he calls “The. God in the Age of Science?: A Critique Of Religious Reason. by. Herman Philipse . Philipse tackles religion from an epistemilogical point of view whereas most.
|Published (Last):||6 August 2006|
|PDF File Size:||12.81 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.49 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If it is a truth claim, they can either be warranted to endorse it without evidence, or not.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason
Philipse deals with this argument early, but as a justification this keeps coming up in Swinburne’s inductive argument. Sign in to use this feature.
Kristina UK marked it as to-read Apr 11, Retrieved 21 February Languages Nederlands Edit links. Volume INew ed. The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History1st ed.
It takes a lot of complexity to i finite persons with finite knowledge, but an infinite person with infinite knowledge is simple?! Each of these options has been defended by prominent analytic philosophers of religion. Finally, if evidence is needed, should its evidential support be assessed by the same logical criteria that we use in evaluating evidence in science, or not?
David Alex rated it really liked it Jan 17, Hairuo marked it as to-read Jan 15, The subtitle, however, ” A Critique jn Religious Reason ” communicates more clearly the author’s intent, namely to provide a critique not just of one kind of religious reason, but all religious reason.
Philipse has written many philosophical works in Dutch, including books on Husserl’s early philosophy of logic, the role of certainty sciehce Descartes’ moral theory, and a widely read Atheist Manifesto A Herman Philipse born 13 May is a professor of philosophy at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.
There are obstacles to this, such as God being an irreducible analogy, or using personal terms to describe something that doesn’t fit our use of personal language.
In chapters 6, 9, 10, 11 and at many other points he argues repeatedly that theism has no significant predictive power and compares it unfavourably with science on this basis.
To understand the way Philipse laid out the critique, it’s worth exploring the three dilemmas Philipse proposes the theist has to answer: Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason – Oxford Scholarship
How much of philosophy generally is commensurate with the methodology of science, and does Philipse’s own book pass this test? Philipse goes about this ambitious task in a series of commendably clear steps. Philipse acknowledges this point indirectly by citing Stephen Jay Gould to the effect that “‘almost every interesting event of life’s history’ is a matter of historical contingency,” a conclusion that, though contested, cannot easily be dismissed because of the difficulty of predicting what living things will evolve from particular initial conditionsfn.
Using a “strategy of subsidiary arguments,” Philipse concludes 1 that theism cannot be stated meaningfully; 2 that if theism were meaningful, it would have no predictive power concerning existing evidence, so that Bayesian arguments cannot get started; and 3 that if the Bayesian cumulative case strategy did work, one should conclude that atheism is more probable than theism.
God in the Age of Science?
This page was last edited on 28 Decemberat Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal wcience for details see www. Yet this idea gets two chapters of logical objections! In my judgment, many of the tactical steps of this book are well argued, notably chapters 3 and 4 on Reformed Theology, as well as the critique of the notion of the personhood of God on the basis of natural reason and the discernment of anthropomorphically-oriented divine purpose on the basis of cosmic order Jan marked it as to-read Apr 06, But for those who find the question interesting, and for those who seek a modern understanding of how to address the question, this book is well worth reading.
God in the Age of Science? Nevertheless, as one goes to higher levels of complexity than those natural systems that can be modelled as aggregates of two-body systems, science becomes less a matter of prediction and more a matter of discovering and unifying phenomena under common explanatory frameworks, as is the case, for instance, with zoology.
Hector Mata rated it it was amazing Sep 03, Abraham – – In William J. I was also left curious to know what possibilities Philipse himself advocates or might phiipse willing to accept as an impersonal uncaused cause or causes of the cosmos, or whether he thinks the reliability of our inferences in trying to resolve such questions simply breaks down at some point.
But the vast majority of the book is taken up with a critical analysis of Swinburne’s ideas.